Research
Articles
PAUL BRACE
Rice University
KEVIN ARCENEAUX
Temple University
MARTIN JOHNSON
University of California, Riverside
STACY G. ULBIG
Missouri State University
Reply to "The
Measurement and Stability of State Citizen Ideology"
Writing
this reply presents a challenge for us since the authors of the preceding
article reinforce most of our substantive points published previously
(Brace et al. 2004, 2006). In this new article, Berry et al. (2007) acknowledge
that there is more cross-sectional than longitudinal variation in the
Berry et al. (1998) measure of state citizen ideology and imply that researchers
should take precautions not to confuse them. They admit that their measure
is tapping something different from survey-based self-identification,
and they also note the distinction between absolute and relative change
in their ideology measure. Given our many points of agreement, this reply
focuses on four key points made by Berry et al. in the preceding article
on which we differ. First, we address the argument that focusing on intra-state
attitude change ignores important attitude change affecting all states
simultaneously. Second, we discuss Berry et al.'s distinction between
symbolic ideology and operational ideology. Third, we consider the validity
and reliability of the various measures. Finally, we revisit our choice
of statistical methods. Although we certainly do not conclude that Berry
et al.'s measure lacks clear utility or relevance, we believe it may serve
a more limited purpose than the authors intended. We urge researchers
to consider the conceptual, methodological, and epistemological concerns
raised in our response before using any indicator of state public opinion.
|
|